I have had my own experiences with gay couples(no, not intimate ) and while many have been friends, I also consider them to have a negative social impact.

Care if I ask why?

In every case before I even was aware that they were involved in such a relationship they were either very emotionally or socially unstable. This goes back 20 yrs easily. One could argue that "everyone" fits that description but in the snapshot of time that I've been around them as compared to "everyone", there is no comparison.

In every case before I even was aware that they were involved in such a relationship they were either very emotionally or socially unstable. This goes back 20 yrs easily. One could argue that "everyone" fits that description but in the snapshot of time that I've been around them as compared to "everyone", there is no comparison.

Maybe because they were trying to hide who they really were? You try living a life that's not who you are and see how well you turn out.

Live life a little and you might begin to understand that for every action there is a reaction. Teachers are with kids for much of the day which can heavily influence them. I don't feel for foreign affairs a President in a gay relationship is a good idea. Pretty simple really....did you expect more? As for the game comment, major developers try to write games that appeal to their audience. Seen one lately?

Personally I got the feeling that the alien sidekick in Unreal II: the Awakening was a little light in the loafers. Kinda like the purple teletubby.

I agree on the President (and other oreign policy makers), and had ocassion to talk to foreign officials while I lived in the DC area, and every so often there would be an overheard comment about how Al Gore was looked at as being a closet-homosexual, and when would the American people figure it out and get rid of him.
That is not me talking, but a paraphrase of at least 10 people I talked to from every continent. People who were well placed within their on governments. So, yes, this does matter tremendously. The Russians tested JFK because they thought he was too young to be strong, and they'd test Bush just as hard if they thought he was gay.

As far as educators are concerned, it's all fine and good if they are the only people to talk to your children about the alphabet and multiplication tables, but if a parent is not active enough in their children's lives and they would allow their children to be *molded* socially, well, can I ask what the parents are actually DOING? Do they think that providing a roof and clothing is all that is necessary? In that case I would hope that the children go ahead and be peacefully gay, the alternatives probably include jail time.

And as far as gay benefits, some companies were already providing this and are now considering removing those benefits until the dust settles. If the insurance companies were providing benefits to live-in couples in California and not going broke, I think they had their business model pretty well researched already.

Europe is a lot more open with homosexuality than anywhere else in the world, from what I saw myself when I was there and from what people have told me that live there (such as Incubus/Chemical, or whatever he's using now ).

Europe is a lot more open with homosexuality than anywhere else in the world, from what I saw myself when I was there and from what people have told me that live there (such as Incubus/Chemical, or whatever he's using now ).

the average european citizen means pretty much nothing where foreign policy is concerned, but i am happy for them that they are comfortable in their own skin.

The world certainly isn't a very nice place, our "own skin" is at the scrutiny of the social court, it'll be cool some day when we can experience real freedom, for now I guess the dilussion will have to do.

For me, homosexual, transgender, transexual, heterosexual, we're all the same, only religion defines us differently which is why I cannot subscribe to such barbarous reason. If marriage is a religious term, i don't want it, civil union works for me. One might claim that government also sees these varying groups of people differently but actually the government got it's information from religion, ironic according to the constitution.

Corporations who remove and deny benefits to non heterosexual couples will eventually pay, and I hope big time.

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot vote in polls in this forumYou cannot attach files in this forumYou can download files in this forum